[jira] Commented: (TAP5-945) Unnecessary and severe lock contention in PerthreadManagerImpl

["Joost Schouten (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-945?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12787966#action_12787966 ] 

Joost Schouten commented on TAP5-945:
-------------------------------------

I'm not quite sure if it is possible to run Tapestry5 on java 1.4 and if anyone does, but looking at the current code the DummyLock will be used with anything but java 1.5. Is that what you want? Should it not be; use DummyLock when java version > 1.5?

> Unnecessary and severe lock contention in PerthreadManagerImpl
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: TAP5-945
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-945
>             Project: Tapestry 5
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: tapestry-core
>    Affects Versions: 5.1.0.5
>            Reporter: Olle Hallin
>            Assignee: Howard M. Lewis Ship
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 5.2.0.0
>
>
> When load testing our new high-volume site before soft launch, we found that we have severe lock contention in org.apache.tapestry5.ioc.internal.services.PerthreadManagerImpl.
> It synchronizes on "this" before invoking ThreadLocal.get() and ThreadLocal.remove(), which I believe is unnecessary. 
> During our tests, approximately  35% of all Tomcat threads were waiting for this lock in any of 10 thread dumps taken 15 seconds apart.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.